As of right now, they are still a distant 2nd in the East and likely wouldn't be a top 4 team in the West.

I wouldn't be so sure. I think with Hayward and Tatum, the Celtics can contend with the Cavs now. Obviously Cleveland would still be the favorite, but it wouldn't stun me if Boston knocked off Cleveland this coming season.

It would shock me.

They got worse defensively. They weren't in the same league as the Cavs last year and I don't think they closed the gap much at all.

There is huge gap between the Celtics and Cavs. The Cavs held at least a 16pt lead in like 80% of the minutes played in the ECF.

Boston still doesn't have an answer for Lebron or Kryie, and will still get killed on the glass like they did on the ECF.

Hayward coming in with Bradley leaving makes them better on offense, but worse on defense. It isn't enough to close the gap with Cavs. Lebron and Kyrie are by far the 2 best players on the floor for either team. That is tough to overcome in a 5v5 sport. These Celtics aren't the 04 Pistons.

DreadNaught wrote:There is huge gap between the Celtics and Cavs. The Cavs held at least a 16pt lead in like 80% of the minutes played in the ECF.

Boston still doesn't have an answer for Lebron or Kryie, and will still get killed on the glass like they did on the ECF.

Hayward coming in with Bradley leaving makes them better on offense, but worse on defense. It isn't enough to close the gap with Cavs. Lebron and Kyrie are by far the 2 best players on the floor for either team. That is tough to overcome in a 5v5 sport. These Celtics aren't the 04 Pistons.

This.

Hayward is a nice addition, but nothing over the top. They lost their best on ball defender in Bradley and a guy that helped will them to their only win against the Cavs in Olynyk. It is obvious they are better offensively, but I don't think they are close to Cleveland.

Everyone else in the East gave up...The West is even more stacked than ever.

We will see. I did say I'd still take Cleveland. All I said was I think Boston is closer this year than they were last year. I never said I'd take Boston.

I think ya'll are severely underrating Gordon Hayward. One of the Celtics' biggest issues last season was their "go-to" guy was 5-9. When Boston HAD to get a clutch bucket, they put it in the hands of a 5-9 guy. Now they have someone to help in that department with Hayward, an all-star. And he's playing for his college coach, who will know who to use him better than anyone.

After all the Paul George, Jimmy Butler, Carmelo Anthony rumors, Cleveland didn't do anything to get better this offseason. It's status quo.

Plus LeBron, who has 41k+ minutes in his career, is a year older and will be 33 this coming season. Not saying he's going to slow down because he arguably had the best run of his career this past season. But at some point his play will fall off...even he can't avoid that.

PrimeMinister wrote:When Utah had to get a bucket in the playoffs they didn't go to Hayward either. I believe Joe Johnson took over then. Hayward is good in an offensive flow, but not the "go get me a bucket" guy.

This process has really overrated Hayward. He's a nice piece, but he's not a superstar. Boston needed a superstar or two to compete with Cleveland.

Who knows, things could change. Lebron could slow (doubtful) and injuries can happen, but on paper this Boston team is the 2nd best team in the East....5th in the West.

I know it was just the Summer league, but Lonzo Ball plays a really exciting brand of basketball. I don't think any of the records he set matter, but seeing him play against higher competition than he did in college (not NBA level) was fun. I really think he's going to be at least very good.

uscbucsfan wrote:I know it was just the Summer league, but Lonzo Ball plays a really exciting brand of basketball. I don't think any of the records he set matter, but seeing him play against higher competition than he did in college (not NBA level) was fun. I really think he's going to be at least very good.

Agreed. I enjoyed watching him play more than I thought I did. He gets everyone involved and plays good off ball D.

I guess we can all but book Derrick Rose to Cleveland now that Irving wants out. What a ****ing mess. Too bad I could only wish for the Magic to have these problems considering that they involve championship caliber players. Meanwhile the Magic just need to pray they even go .500 and that alone would be a win considering the hole left by Hennigan they have to climb out of.

Last edited by Swashy on Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

Derrick Rose and the Cavs agree on a 1yr/$2.1mil deal.....Is he really that washed up now? Guy was a franchise player not too long ago. Now in an age where players are getting 8 figures easily, Derrick Rose at 28 signs a deal for $2mil?? Is it that bad for him now?

Bootz2004 wrote:Derrick Rose and the Cavs agree on a 1yr/$2.1mil deal.....Is he really that washed up now? Guy was a franchise player not too long ago. Now in an age where players are getting 8 figures easily, Derrick Rose at 28 signs a deal for $2mil?? Is it that bad for him now?

Bootz2004 wrote:Derrick Rose and the Cavs agree on a 1yr/$2.1mil deal.....Is he really that washed up now? Guy was a franchise player not too long ago. Now in an age where players are getting 8 figures easily, Derrick Rose at 28 signs a deal for $2mil?? Is it that bad for him now?

Bootz2004 wrote:Derrick Rose and the Cavs agree on a 1yr/$2.1mil deal.....Is he really that washed up now? Guy was a franchise player not too long ago. Now in an age where players are getting 8 figures easily, Derrick Rose at 28 signs a deal for $2mil?? Is it that bad for him now?

I don't agree that this is a bad move for the Cavs if they are bringing him in to be #4 off the bench or something like that...he still has the capability of getting hot for a 5 or 6 minute stretch. If they are expecting 25 mins per game, then its a bad move.

I don't agree that this is a bad move for the Cavs if they are bringing him in to be #4 off the bench or something like that...he still has the capability of getting hot for a 5 or 6 minute stretch. If they are expecting 25 mins per game, then its a bad move.

Rose is shadow of his MVP season back in '10-'11. But he's played in atleast 64 games and averaged over 30 minutes per game two years in a row and can still get to the rim with a great mid-range game. If he can play 60+ games for a 3rd consecutive season than $2.1m is a bargain imo.

But the injury concern is always you MUST hedge for that reason in addition to the fact Rose's back-up still plays 15-18 minutes even when Rose is healthy.

With Kyrie wanting out, I'd like to see the Cavs and Knicks work out a 3 or 4 team trade that gets Melo to the Cavs along with a solid point guard.

ESPN Sources: On Kyrie Irving front, Cavs were given four preferred landing spots: New York, Miami, San Antonio, Minnesota.

As a Twolves fan, I'm torn. On one hand, Kyrie/Butler/Towns is arguably a top 3 trio in the NBA. But it would be hard to lose Wiggins, who is 3-4 years younger than Kyrie and has better potential on defense (already a 24+ppg scorer).

If MIN hadn't already signed Jeff Teague (who they can't trade until Dec. 15), I'd be fully on board. But if they trade Wiggins in a deal for Kyrie, that really leaves the roster unbalanced.

ESPN Sources: On Kyrie Irving front, Cavs were given four preferred landing spots: New York, Miami, San Antonio, Minnesota.

As a Twolves fan, I'm torn. On one hand, Kyrie/Butler/Towns is arguably a top 3 trio in the NBA. But it would be hard to lose Wiggins, who is 3-4 years younger than Kyrie and has better potential on defense (already a 24+ppg scorer).

If MIN hadn't already signed Jeff Teague (who they can't trade until Dec. 15), I'd be fully on board. But if they trade Wiggins in a deal for Kyrie, that really leaves the roster unbalanced.

It will really be interesting to see how this Kyrie thing works out.

Kyrie does not have any kind of no trade clause in his deal, so his preferred landing spots are meaningless to the Cavs who will deal him wherever they get the most in return, as they should.

I agree it will be interesting to see how this unravels. I don't think the T-Wolves trade Wiggins away (atleast I would not), he and Towns are the future there and Wiggins has the potential to dominate on BOTH ends of the court where he can match-up defensively on the elite wings players in the NBA.

pewterpirates wrote:As a Twolves fan, I'm torn. On one hand, Kyrie/Butler/Towns is arguably a top 3 trio in the NBA. But it would be hard to lose Wiggins, who is 3-4 years younger than Kyrie and has better potential on defense (already a 24+ppg scorer).

If MIN hadn't already signed Jeff Teague (who they can't trade until Dec. 15), I'd be fully on board. But if they trade Wiggins in a deal for Kyrie, that really leaves the roster unbalanced.

It will really be interesting to see how this Kyrie thing works out.

Kyrie does not have any kind of no trade clause in his deal, so his preferred landing spots are meaningless to the Cavs who will deal him wherever they get the most in return, as they should.

I agree it will be interesting to see how this unravels. I don't think the T-Wolves trade Wiggins away (atleast I would not), he and Towns are the future there and Wiggins has the potential to dominate on BOTH ends of the court where he can match-up defensively on the elite wings players in the NBA.

I realize Kyrie doesn't have any say, but it's still shocking for him to mention Minnesota as one of his preferred destinations....a team that hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. I get that the Cavs will trade him for the best return....but that could easily be Wiggins. I'd take Wiggins over Eric Bledsoe. Boston could make a nice offer but IDK why the Celtics would do that.

I hope they don't trade Wiggins. Even though Wiggins and Butler are kind of similar players, I'd prefer to keep Wiggins instead of trading him for Kyrie. It's already going to be tough enough for Minnesota to make everything work financially with Wiggins, Butler and Towns in 2 years. Replacing Wiggins with Kyrie would make staying under the salary cap incredibly tougher when they're all due for max extensions.

DreadNaught wrote:Kyrie does not have any kind of no trade clause in his deal, so his preferred landing spots are meaningless to the Cavs who will deal him wherever they get the most in return, as they should.

I agree it will be interesting to see how this unravels. I don't think the T-Wolves trade Wiggins away (atleast I would not), he and Towns are the future there and Wiggins has the potential to dominate on BOTH ends of the court where he can match-up defensively on the elite wings players in the NBA.

I realize Kyrie doesn't have any say, but it's still shocking for him to mention Minnesota as one of his preferred destinations....a team that hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. I get that the Cavs will trade him for the best return....but that could easily be Wiggins. I'd take Wiggins over Eric Bledsoe. Boston could make a nice offer but IDK why the Celtics would do that.

I hope they don't trade Wiggins. Even though Wiggins and Butler are kind of similar players, I'd prefer to keep Wiggins instead of trading him for Kyrie. It's already going to be tough enough for Minnesota to make everything work financially with Wiggins, Butler and Towns in 2 years. Replacing Wiggins with Kyrie would make staying under the salary cap incredibly tougher when they're all due for max extensions.

Without including Wiggins (Towns is out of the question) The T-Wolves aren't in the running for Kyrie. From what I've heard it would be Wiggins and someone else for Kyrie.

If the Cavs would accept IT and the Nets pick for Kyrie, it would be awesome for them...wouldn't have to pay IT the max and upgrade the position, but people are saying the Cavs would want a player or two ( Crowder) in addition if they were going to send Kyrie to their "rival" in the Celtics.

I'm leaning towards Kyrie will stay on the Cavs this year, unless someone gives them a ton. I think the Kemba Walker, Kidd-Gilchrist rumor makes the most sense for Cleveland.

edit: The worst thing Cleveland can do is "prepare for the future" and get picks/young players for Kyrie...wasting LeBron's last season.

Bootz2004 wrote:Derrick Rose and the Cavs agree on a 1yr/$2.1mil deal.....Is he really that washed up now? Guy was a franchise player not too long ago. Now in an age where players are getting 8 figures easily, Derrick Rose at 28 signs a deal for $2mil?? Is it that bad for him now?

I don't think he is even worth that. Bad look for the Cavs.

Damn that's shocking. I didn't even know he played for the Knicks last year either until I heard this. Shame too because he was so talented.

Rose played over 60 games and averaged over 30min per game last season (and the year before fwiw).

He's obviously not the MVP he once was, but seems to be more reliable than his reputation based on the past 2 years. I think this is about all we can expect from Rose at this point which is why the Cavs new GM called him a back-up yesterday.